Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 01/18/22 Vol.389, Q Day 1544

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 01/18/22 Vol.389, Q Day 1544, little jeremiah wrote:

Adding TLS since S&S addressed this to him, and sorry to bother you, ransomnote. This zombie theory crawled out of the grave again.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stars&Stripes said:

NOAH discusses MICHAEL FLYNN’s PRAYER and HANK KUNNEMAN

https://welovetrump.com/2022/01/20/my-one-question-to-michael-flynn-and-hank-kunneman/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The theory that Gen.Michael Flynn is somehow bad and used an occult/demoniac prayer should have its own thread. It was dissected, vivisected, corrected and put to bed threads ago. Gen.Flynn is a great hero, patriot, and devout man and I am tired of slander against him.

The video at the link juxtaposed footage of Gen Flynn's prayer with that of the original, as initially presented during one of Clare Prophet's channeling sessions in 1984. I don't see how the very close match between both presentations can be 'corrected' to indicate they bear relationship to each other.

What's baffling to me is that it's as if I turned my head for a moment and when I looked back, it seems MAGA is trying to or has already elevated Gen. Flynn to status of spiritual leader. I just don't know how this happened. Was it fondness for the General, or perhaps admiration for his strength under fire that made some in MAGA ask him to lead spiritually? Was it the means the General chose to help us 'stay together' and fortify WWG1WGA?

For whatever purpose, it seems Gen Flynn is/was performing the spiritual leadership role, and his use of Clare Prophet's 'channeled' occult prayer is going to be met with a variety of reactions, within MAGA and this is true for all, both great and small, who stand in the leadership role. There's no way to 'shame' people out of objecting to it or questioning it - nor should there be.

I was among those who believed, in spite of red flags, that G. W. Bush loved God (!) and was a patriot (!). I'm devastated by the degree of my errors there, and I'm on watch against conflating sentiment (e.g., my heartfelt approval of Bush's seemingly 'sincere' speech/conduct at Ground Zero') with observable facts.

I'm not saying Flynn=Bush. I'm saying if I would now, if given the chance, go back and view Bush objectively instead of through sentiment, then I will advocate doing the same with everyone who crosses our radar.

I wonder if his endurance and strength under fire inspired some people to elevate him above 'mere mortal' that he must now be all things to all people. When people become disillusioned with those whom they idolize, the backlash can be ugly. The burden is, I think, upon us to remember all are mortal with strengths and weaknesses, similarities and differences.

Where there is a desire for spiritual leadership, then let's speak plainly and openly about what is observed from said leadership. I thought parts of the linked article linked were excellent, and appreciated the work done to flesh out G. W. Bush's public speeches which incorporated occult meaning. Imagine my surprise to see 'Lucis Trust' rise again in the article, as that was the name I first learned in the 80s when I was learning about that conspiracy theory known as The New World Order.

We on the Q thread count among our number people of many faiths and some who do not embrace a faith and together we fight for common cause. We care about each other, support each other, many (but not all) of us pray together, but that doesn't mean we escape criticism for things we may say about faith.

I've gotten the impression that many (majority?) in MAGA are Christian, and a sizabke proportion are protestant Christian. So Flynn's decision to use a prayer that group would find repellent surprises me. There are many less specific prayers that appeal to many faiths - but he chose a prayer by an occult nutter.

When some in the public pointed to the occult origins of his speech, his lack of restorative response surprises me too. I think I read a quote where he dismissed concerns or objects with angry disgust. Again, I'm surprised that one occupying (at the time) the role of spiritual leader would make that decision. If he didn't know it was based on Clare Prophet's 'channeled' prayer, then say so. If he wanted to make a statement of his own faith, then do it. But if he's to serve as spiritual leader, he should at least understand that the issue is central to many and will not be glossed over. Uneasy lies the head that wears some kind of crown or other.

Flynn's decision making around the prayer and the aftermath makes me think he's not at all comfortable with this role for himself. If so, he can use this issue to clarify the means by which he aspires to lead a portion of the fight - but he has chosen not to explain him objectives or reasoning.

Many of us are quite fond of him, so when I heard he was being unfairly linked to Project Pegasus I was disgusted and angry. Then I heard the recording in which Flynn asked, in a vulnerable way, Lin Wood not to bring up Flynn's relationship to Pegasus. I was made aware that because of my fondness for him, I pre-judged information before even checking it out. I don't want to travel that path for anyone, ever again.

I had assumed any connection had to be 100% false when in fact Flynn acknowledged some sort of connection. I didn't investigate beyond that - I just caught myself exercising some 'hero worship' over digging, and where has that gotten us in the past?

I believe Flynn is devout, but his devotion is to another faith than mine. I could never speak such a prayer, much less lead a congregation in it.

I never investigated his faith because when I saw him last, he wasn't a spiritual leader. I have friends and loved ones who are different faiths or do not embrace any faith, so the fact that Flynn doesn't share mine doesn't repel me. But his decision to recite Clare Prophet's 'channeled' occult prayer, while functioning in a leadership role, does repel me.

If he's held up as a Christian leader than I feel justified in disagreeing, even publicly with that assessment. The likelihood MAGA would have a dominant subgroup who embraced Flynn's spiritual beliefs is not large, IMHO, so I don't see the point in his using his spiritual faith as a WWG1WGA rallying point.

I think Flynn's best role is in motivating people, holding them accountable (don't complain, do something) etc. Flynn's statements of faith cannot serve as a rallying point, and so I don't believe he can serve as a spiritual leader of MAGA.

As a Christian trying to follow the will of God as outlined in the Bible, I must reject Flynn's spiritual leadership - even after we watched in horror as he 'took one for the team' (understatement of 2022). It doesn't mean I know the condition of his heart; it means I cannot accept his role as spiritual leader. I'm not slandering him; I'm pointing to his decisions as a spiritual leader and saying I object and will not follow him.

God can still use Flynn's energy and patriotism, if He wills, to serve His purposes, and I watch for that. But I don't think Flynn should have a leadership role in MAGA based on his initial decision making, and his response to the conflict.

The Flynn I had come to expect would have made different decisions and responded with respect and clarification - yes even if he was disgusted. Leaders don't always get to give vent in public to their disappointments in humanity. He created a divisive problem and then made it worse when it didn't go well. That doesn't diminish his service to our country, but his service doesn't shield his spiritual leadership from critique.

This is pretty thin. Once you hit the iceberg you are talked into continuing on,yeah right,I’ll buy that but not today.
the entire reuters (al-reuters) excuse is pretty thin in my estimation,waaay too many holes for a supposed “journalist” explanation. With time it could be easily torn apart.
If you accidently hit an iceberg its more likely to do it in rough windy weather with huge seas and low visibilty not calm seas with a full moon.Makes no sense.
.......................
From the link;
TITANIC’S SINKING WAS AN ACCIDENT

Experts widely agree the liner disaster, which killed more than 1,500 people (here), was an accident. They do, however, debate the finer details.

One explanation, Behe said, is that the ship’s officers “mistakenly believed” that good visibility on the open sea would be an advantage for spotting any hazards ahead in good time. He added: “The ensuing collision with the iceberg was just an unfortunate result of a ‘perfect storm’ of unfavourable circumstances (dead-calm water, no moon, etc) and had nothing to do with any silly conspiracy theory connected with the federal reserve.”

Reuters reported on another possible explanation in 2010 that suggested the boat hit an iceberg due to a basic steering error, and only sank as fast as it did because an official persuaded the captain to continue sailing (here).

Encyclopaedia Britannica says such a steering mistake “caused the Titanic to turn slower than if it had been moving at its original speed. Most experts believe the ship would have survived if it had hit the iceberg head-on”(here).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Where We Go 1, We Go All